Remington XCR or Weatherby Vanguard Sub-MOA Stainless???

[ahhartenstein]

Ok guys, I need your expert opinions. In the market for a new rifle and I have my search narrowed down to 2 rifles and a few calibers but can't make up my darn mind now. So, I need your help in choosing the rifle and caliber. I'll be using it for hunting only, deer 90% of the time but I also want a caliber that I can use to hunt elk, black bear, and any other form on North American big game with the exception of grizzlies. Other criteria include that is must be relatively lightweight, and all-weather type rifle, and it must be an excellent/flat shooter. I mean, I want to drive tacks with this thing at the range. I realize I may not get this type of accuracy out of the box especially with the XCR, so I am willing to give my g-smith some business to "accurize" the gun if necessary. The Weatherby should be a tack driver right out of the box. I have heard some negatives about the XCR's accuracy. This is where I am...

1. Remington 700 XCR in 270WSM, 300 WSM, 300 Win. Mag, or possibly 300 RUM.

2. Weatherby Sub-MOA Stainless in 270 WSM, 300 WSM, or 300 Win. Mag.

I was interested in the Browning Stainless Stalker in one of these calibers at first until I handled one the other night. Even though I liked its reputation for accuracy, the action was entirely way too loud when cycling the bolt and I wasn't too pleased with all that white metal on the bolt. Gave the gun a cheap look. So that's now out of the picture.

Anybody that has one of these rifles in the calibers listed, I'd love to hear their thoughts. Any pros and cons of both in regards to accuracy, handling, recoil, and use in the field? Suggested g-smithing work as well? Right now I am leaning toward the XCR but could be convinced otherwise. After all, I am a life long Rem. fan.

Thanks for the help!
Adam

 

[Quintin Likely]

My dad has a Weatherby Vanguard in 7mm Remington Magnum. When I can hold on tight enough, it'll put three shots in under an inch at 100 shots, but it gets a little wild as the barrel heats up; no big deal though, I can't imagine anyone with any sense wanting to shoot that thing all day. It's loud. Very loud. And kicks a lot. It's not one of my favorite rifles to shoot.

I have a Remington 700VS in .308 that's a fine shooting rifle too. I doubt you'll go wrong with either a Remington or a Vanguard (it's kinda tough for me to call a Vanguard a "Weatherby" ) for your intended purposes. The Remington would be nice since anyone and their grandmother can work on a Remington, and there's certainly no shortage of parts.

To throw something else at you, consider Savage rifles as well. Great rifles for the money.

 

[ahhartenstein]

Q/L,

My Dad also has a Weatherby Vanguard, a VGX in .25-06, and it too is a sweet shooter. Didn't shoot great out of the box until he had some trigger work done. Now he uses it for deer and varmints and he consistently kills g-hogs at 300 yards with factory ammo. So in short, I agree that both the XCR and V-guard would be great rifles. Either way, I am willing to put a little extra $$$ into the rifle to hopefully make it sub-MOA @ 100 yds if need be.

As for the Savage, I have had a couple of bad experiences with them so unfortunately they are out of the question.

Thanks for the posting!

 

[George Hill]

My nod goes to the Remington 700 XCR.
Top that with a Nikon Titanium scope... man that is a good looking package.
Any of those calibers are great so good luck picking one out.

 

[DeerHuntr]

I have a .270WSM Vanguard Sporter SS topped with a Leupold VXII 3-9x50and it shoots sub MOA even though it isn't the SUB-MOA model, couldn't be happier with the gun or the caliber. Shot 3 whitetail with it last year and not one of them made a step, anchored them where they stood. I am shooting 140gr Nosler Accubonds and if you do your job the gun will damn sure do his, I think it will do everything you want it to do but the .300WSM might be a bit better choice on Elk although I have no doubt the .270WSM will do the job if you put it in the right place. Go with the Vanguard, I'm quite sure you'll be happy

 

[ArmedBear]

My Vanguard Sporter is a great gun. I'll vouch for the Weatherby (Howa).

If you want to drive tacks at the range, the .300 WM is probably your best choice. And plan on handloading.

 

[SpeedAKL]

The .300 Win Mag has a good reputation in the competition field as a very accurate long-range round. If the recoil is too much for you, a .308 would do the job if those rifles come in that cartridge.

 

[ArmedBear]

BTW you want two contradictory things: a lightweight hunting gun, and a tackdriver for the range.

We'd all love a gun for $500 that doesn't rust when left in saltwater, weighs three pounds, turns in .25" groups with Wal Mart ammo, shoots flat to 800 yards, recoils like a .22LR and will take down a moose. Oh, and it ought to look really pretty, too. Ain't gonna happen.

What do you REALLY want it for? What other rifles do you already have?

WSMs are not at the top of the list of range rounds. But they are great compact rifle rounds. .300 WM is a good, if expensive, accuracy round, but guns for it are heavy and long. .30-06 would probably serve you better 99% of the time. Hot .30-06 like Hornady Light Magnum ammo or homebrew equivalent will surely work for elk. But a .30-06 is still a long-action round.

 

[Essex County]

I vote for the 700............For a distant second. Essex

 

[ahhartenstein]

Thanks for all the posts guys. Does anyone out there actually have an XCR???

Essex County,
What is #1 if the 700 is a distant second???

Armed Bear,
I realize that it will be tough to get all that I want in one package. That;s why I am here and getting different opinions. But what I want is not necessarily contradictory in all cases. My buddy has an A-Bolt SS that he hunts with all the time a consistently cuts holes at the range with factory ammo. A lightweight gun that drives tacks...
I want it for exactly what I said in my original post. Deer 90% of the time but I also want the capability to hunt 99% of North American big game in 99%of all possible scenarios with the same rifle. I already have a .30-06, actually two 06's if you count my M1 Garand, and I love the gun and I love the caliber. Quite frankly though, I am not fully confident in this gun when it comes to certain game and certain long range shots. I don't want to go up against a trophy with equipment that I am not fully confident will get the job done. To me, confidence in you rifle/equipment is a must otherwise you will not perform to the best of your abilities. Thats why I'm looking for a new rifle. One in which I will be confident using in most cases against most NA game.

Just about every magazine and internet article I have read about WSM's states that the shorter casing promotes more efficient powder burn which in turn promotes greater inherent accuracy. This, of course, is in comparison to long action calibers. Why is it then that the .300 WM has a better reputation as an accurate long range round when compared with the .300 WSM? This seems to contradict all those articles I have ready. Which is inherently more accurate, the .300 WM or the .300 WSM?

I am not yet a handloader but I plan to be soon. My dad has some of the equipment that he is planning on giving to me. So it is a matter of reading some books, doing an inventory of equipment, and purchasing other equipment and the necessary supplies. It's about time too. I have spent far too much $$$ on factory ammo in my lifetime.

 

[GunNut]

I really like the XCR and have been considering getting one, but it seems kind of over priced for what you are getting. Do you really need a coated stainless steel gun? I've never had a problem with corrosion on a stainless gun. But yes it is a great looking gun.

The Vanguard Sub-MOA is also a sweet looking gun and great shooting too.

You might also look at getting a Howa barreled action and picking a quality stock to bed it into.

Steve

 

[itgoesboom]

Just about every magazine and internet article I have read

I think we found the problem.

Just kidding, kinda.

I have heard some conflicting data regarding WSMs and effiency, but I think they are a little more efficient. More accurate, maybe, but I doubt you will ever see the difference. The variance in manufacture is probably more significant than that.

I won't ever give a person a hard time regarding caliber choice however, since that is a very personal decision. The only time I do hassle people over caliber choice is when a caliber is too much for them.

Got a friend who shoots well with various .30-06 rifles, and I have let him shoot my AR, and I was impressed. But, when he gets behind his .300 Winchester Mag, the accuracy is less than impressive.

Confidence is very important though, so, if a bigger gun is what it takes......

You might also look at getting a Howa barreled action and picking a quality stock to bed it into.

This is some good advice. But also, not a bad way to go if you want to do the Remington as well.

I personally own a Weatherby Vanguard (in .30-06). It's not one of the SUB-MOA ones, came with a test target showing 1.25".

With my handloads, it averages .5" 3-shot groups (center-to-center) at 100 yards when I do my part. I have ofcourse shot my fair share of crappy groups with it though to be honest. But when I concentrate, off a steady rest, and do everything right, my groups are down right scary small. Best was about .310" (ETA, Actually, went back and it was .340"), and I have several groups under .4". (Go ahead, call BS, I will post pics).

Don't see how a WSM would really be much more accurate than that.

ETA:

Same friend with the .300mag; I saw his 15 y/o son take a good sized cow elk at 325 yards with a .30-06, with one shot.

Well, to be correct, he took about 5 bad shots, and missed his elk each time at about 200 yards. Elk stopped at 325, he drilled it right through the vitals, and it went down. Ran about 35 yards, and there was a prety good blood trail to follow.